Statute of limitations in Bulgaria: periods and court practice

The limitation period (погасителна давност) remains one of the most frequently raised and, at the same time, most frequently missed defences in civil proceedings. Since the introduction of the absolute limitation period under Art. 112 of the Obligations and Contracts Act (ЗЗД) (in force since 2 June 2021) and a series of interpretative decisions of the General Assembly of the Civil and Commercial Chambers (ОСГТК) of the Supreme Court of Cassation (ВКС), the subject calls for an up-to-date and systematic reading.

This analysis covers the statutory framework of Art. 110-120 ЗЗД, the limitation periods and how to tell them apart, suspension and interruption, and the current practice of the ВКС, including the pending interpretative case No. 2/2023 of the ОСГТК, which is expected to redraw the rules on lapse of enforcement proceedings (перемпция) against joint debtors.

The legal nature of the limitation period

The limitation period is a span of time whose expiry extinguishes not the claim itself but the possibility of enforcing it through the courts. The claim becomes a natural obligation: it continues to exist, but the creditor loses the right to enforce it by compulsion if the debtor relies on the limitation. Anything paid after the limitation period has expired cannot be reclaimed (Art. 118 ЗЗД).

The institution must be distinguished from two close legal phenomena. Acquisitive prescription (придобивна давност, under the Property Act) leads to the acquisition of a real right, not to the extinction of a contractual claim. Preclusive time limits (limitation periods in the broad sense), for their part, extinguish the substantive right itself and are applied by the court of its own motion, unlike the limitation period, which requires an express objection.

Limitation periods under the ЗЗД: 5, 3 and 10 years

The system of limitation periods in the ЗЗД is built from a general rule and special cases. Classifying the claim correctly determines the applicable period and is the starting point for any assessment of whether the claim has been extinguished.

It should be noted that the absolute limitation period under Art. 112 ЗЗД does not replace the general periods but supplements them. It sets a final limit on the possibility of enforcing a money claim against a natural person, regardless of the interruptions under Art. 116 ЗЗД. For a detailed analysis of its scope and the eight exceptions, see the analysis of the 10-year absolute limitation period under Art. 112 ЗЗД.

The concept of “periodic payments” and ТР 3/2011 of the ОСГТК

Classifying a claim as a “periodic payment” under Art. 111, letter “в” ЗЗД is among the most disputed practical questions. Interpretative Decision (ТР) No. 3/2011 of 18 May 2012 of the ОСГТК of the ВКС gives a binding definition that distinguishes periodic payments from the instalment performance of a single obligation.

The practical significance is considerable. Claims of heating utilities, water suppliers and mobile operators for services consumed are periodic payments and are extinguished by the 3-year period. By contrast, the instalments under a bank loan agreement are NOT periodic payments within the meaning of letter “в”. They are the performance of one overall obligation spread over time, so the general 5-year period applies to them.

Start, suspension and interruption of the limitation period (Art. 114-117)

Calculating the limitation period requires the starting point to be determined precisely and any suspensions and interruptions to be taken into account. Art. 114 ЗЗД provides that the limitation period runs from the day the claim became due and payable, with special rules for claims arising from tort (непозволено увреждане) and for contractual penalties.

The distinction between suspension (Art. 115 ЗЗД) and interruption (Art. 116 ЗЗД) is of key importance. With suspension, the limitation period temporarily stops running, and once the obstacle falls away the time already elapsed is preserved and continues to count. With interruption, by contrast, the time already elapsed is wiped out and a completely new limitation period begins to run.

Absolute limitation period under Art. 112 ЗЗД: scope and transitional regime

Introduced by State Gazette (ДВ) issue 102 of 2020 and in force since 2 June 2021, the absolute limitation period extinguishes money claims against natural persons after 10 years, regardless of interruption, unless the obligation has been deferred or made payable in instalments. The institution aims to eliminate the phenomenon of the “eternal debtor”.

The original wording of § 2 of the Transitional and Final Provisions (ПЗР) provided for retroactive effect for existing cases. By Decision No. 4 of 20 April 2021 in Constitutional Case No. 1/2021, the Constitutional Court declared § 2 of the ПЗР unconstitutional at the request of the Supreme Bar Council (Висш адвокатски съвет). The practical consequence is that the absolute limitation period runs equally for all obligations from the date the law entered into force.

Current ВКС practice and the pending interpretative case 2/2023 of the ОСГТК

In recent years the interpretative practice of the ОСГТК of the ВКС has clarified a number of disputed questions concerning limitation in enforcement proceedings and the force of res judicata (сила на пресъдено нещо). Knowing this practice is necessary for calculating time limits correctly in enforcement proceedings that were already pending.

ТР No. 3/2020 of the ОСГТК, issued on 28 March 2023, is of particular importance. It holds that the limitation period does not run while the enforcement proceedings last, in respect of enforcement cases opened before the adoption of ТР No. 2/2013 (26 June 2015). This resolves the conflicting case law on proceedings that were already pending.

How to raise an objection that the limitation period has expired

The decisive procedural rule is Art. 120 ЗЗД: the limitation period is not applied of the court’s own motion. This means the court cannot take an expired limitation period into account by itself, even if it is obvious from the evidence. The debtor must expressly rely on it by way of an objection.

In claim proceedings, the limitation objection must be made in the defence to the statement of claim (отговор на исковата молба) within the period under Art. 131 of the Civil Procedure Code (ГПК). Missing that period precludes the objection. Where enforcement proceedings are pending, the debtor has a declaratory action under Art. 124 ГПК to establish that the claim does not exist (is not owed) because the limitation period has expired.

Finally, the rule in Art. 119 ЗЗД must be taken into account: when the principal claim is extinguished, the ancillary claims arising from it are extinguished too, even if their own limitation period has not expired. This is particularly relevant for accessory claims such as interest and penalties. For the related subject of a debtor’s acts that harm creditors, see the analysis of the Pauline action (Павлов иск) under Art. 135 ЗЗД.

Pravko provides legal information but does not replace advice from a lawyer. For important legal matters, consult a licensed lawyer.